An Interface by Any Other Name…

Interface

Over the last ten years there has been an explosion in devices, apps, and content marketplaces, all champing at the bit to deliver ever-improving TV experiences. This revolution has birthed the terms cord-cutter, cord-shaver, and cord never. It’s disrupted the way content is traditionally distributed and completely redesigned the interfaces we use to watch TV. It may seem superficial, but these interfaces may be the most critical part of the modern streaming video experience. Whether you’re using a Roku, an Apple TV, an Amazon Fire, a Chromecast, or one of the dozens of other streaming boxes, the one thing they have in common is they use apps. Each of those apps was designed by the content creator to deliver an experience that the creator felt was best suited to their content. WatchESPN for example has a very specific look and feel entirely different from Netflix. This is a good thing and it’s part of what allows these apps to differentiate themselves in a competitive environment. Similarly, the devices themselves compete on look and feel. The layout of apps on a Roku, the way users search through apps, the way users download new apps, even the color, shape, and typeface used on the Roku are all part of what makes a Roku a Roku. Considering most streaming boxes leverage the same popular apps, it’s fair to say one of the only things that the myriad streaming boxes use to compete is their unique interfaces. This is important because the FCC is suggesting the reason it needs to step into the pay-TV box marketplace is because there aren’t enough competing interfaces and it’s hard to find programs to watch. Are there not enough high quality, highly-functional interfaces on the market? Does the video marketplace need government intervention? Let’s take a look at some of the dozens of interfaces competing for eyeballs and dollars and the many things that differentiate them and see if the FCC is right. Apple TV, for example boasts voice search, a clean, white-background interface with sharp lines and dynamic parallax effects. And it exclusively offers access to iTunes, making available more than just movies and TV but games and shopping apps. It has a sleek, sexy remote that doesn’t require additional batteries and the device itself is appealing and minimalist. Oh, and it does integrated search. Just ask Siri to show you ‘Breaking Bad’ and you’ll see it available on Netflix, iTunes, and from other streaming sources. appletvos-800x508 Roku on the other hand has a distinct deep purple look and classic window-pane feel. It’s become Roku’s calling card. It also offers integrated search – in some ways improved over the Apple TV search function – and uses a traditional button based remote preferred by many. It also has a USB port built into the device making external media easy to view. Roku doesn’t have access to iTunes, but Time Warner Cable already offers its service on Roku to its customers, and Comcast just announced that it will offer its service via an Xfinity Roku app, making box rentals entirely optional. Roku is one of the most popular streaming devices in America. Home And here’s one of the newest members of the club, Amazon Fire. Like Apple and iTunes, Amazon has an extensive content library that can’t be accessed on an Apple TV. It’s also less expensive than the Apple TV. It too offers voice search and a clean, sleek, dark interface but as a differentiator, it features a MicroSD slot, for easy media viewing. Fire-Home-Page These are a few of the most popular streaming devices, but Smart TVs each offer their own look and feel and there are dozens of other small-brand streaming products entering (and exiting) the marketplace all the time. So forgive us for being puzzled by the FCC’s assertion that there isn’t any choice in devices, interfaces, or ways to search for programs to watch. Because from where we sit, not only is the market delivering high quality, highly-functional interfaces on highly differentiated devices, it is also delivering an ever growing array of powerful, distinct, and competing video apps for consumers to enjoy on those devices. And with new deals like the one made between Comcast and Roku, the dozens of pay-TV apps already available, and ever expanding TV Everywhere technology, the idea that the FCC needs to step in and manipulate this market because it lacks choice, competition, or quality is more than just legally unsustainable, it’s absurd. This blog also appeared in CTAM Smartbrief. To sign up, click here.